Ridgeway v R
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Neutral Citation | 1995-0419 HCA B,[1995] HCA 66 |
| Year | 1995 |
| Date | 1995 |
| Court | High Court |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
185 cases
- Employment Advocate v Williamson
-
Synon and Others v Hewitt and Others
...[2001] UKHL 53; [2001] 1 W.L.R. 2060. R. v. Mack (1988) 44 C.C.C. (3d) 513. Reg. v. Latif [1996] 1 W.L.R. 104. Ridgeway v. The Queen (1995) 184 C.L.R. 19. Sherman v. United States (1958) 356 U.S. 369. Sorrells v. United States (1932) 287 U.S. 435. Taunton Deane Borough Council v. Brice (199......
-
DPP v Cash
...the one hand and fairness to the accused, on the other, have to be weighed ( Bunning v. Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54; Ridgway v. The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19); and in New Zealand, while it has long been held that the judicial discretion to exclude unfairly obtained evidence is wider than that rec......
-
The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v J.C.
...of crime, on the one hand, and fairness to the accused, on the other, have to be weighed ( Bunning v Cross (1978) 141 CLR 54; Ridgeway v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 19); and in New Zealand, while it has long been held that the judicial discretion to exclude unfairly obtained evidence is wider ......
Get Started for Free
16 books & journal articles
-
THE COURT'S DISCRETION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES AND EMERGING IMPLICATIONS IN THE CRIMINAL SPHERE
...377 at [27]. 19 It was not necessary because the High Court ruled that the discretionary power did not apply to disciplinary cases. 20(1995) 184 CLR 19. 21[2001] 1 WLR 2060. 22Law Society of Singapore v Tan Guat Neo Phyllis[2008] 2 SLR(R) 239 at [113]. 23 Which was the case in Ridgeway v R(......
-
Due Process, Judicial Power and Chapter III in the New High Court
...the generalised due process principle: see, eg, Abebe v Commonwealth (1999) 197 CLR 510, 592 and Ebner (2000) 205 CLR 337, 372–3. 70 (1995) 184 CLR 19 ('Ridgeway'). 2004 Chapter III in the New High Court 213 ___________________________________________________________________________________......
-
Subject Index
...v Sanderson PlumbingProducts, Inc., 530 US 133 (2000).........................................................8, 9Ridgeway v R (1995) 184 CLR 19 ........51Ritchie Grocer Co. v Aetna Casualty &Surety Co., 426 F 2d 499 (8th Cir.,1970) ...............................................165Rocheste......
-
Prosecutorial Discretion and Judicial Review: An Analysis of Recent Canadian and South African Decisions
...79 Per Lord Blackburn, Metropolitan Bank Ltd v Pooley (1885) 10 App Cas. 210 at 220–221. 80 (1999) 198 CLR 380 at 391 para 25. 81 (1995) 184 CLR 19 at 74–75. 82 Wil liams v Spautz (n 53) 509. 83 Oceanic Sun Line Special Shipping Co Inc v Fay (1988) 165 CLR 197 at 242–243, 246–247. 84 Hamilt......
Get Started for Free